Letters: March 30, 2013

More handouts called buyouts

Re: “Retired teachers could get $25,000 buyouts,” A1, March 28: It did not take long. As soon as the San Diego Unified School District gets more taxpayer money, it cannot wait to find ways to literally squander it.

To give a retroactive and unnecessary $25,000 “buyout” to 24 teachers who have already retired is beyond absurd. This is not a buyout by any means of the definition and purpose of a buyout. This is a disgraceful handout of taxpayer money to appease the greedy SDUSD teachers and their union.

It would never happen in the private sector.

Larry Hennessee

San Diego

And you thought that Proposition 30 tax money would go “for the children?” Look closely, voters. Off the top, $25,000 in your tax dollars will go to each [San Diego Unified} teacher that retires soon (cost to the district is $2.5 million), plus another $600,000 in retroactive payments to 24 employees that retired in the last year.

If that isn’t enough, the labor union has obtained pay raises for all teachers. Of the $32 million in additional state revenue from Prop. 30 slated for San Diego Unified, $17 million will go for pay raises.

What happened to the promises made to voters that the tax money would go to our schools to enhance our educational system? What happened to the money that was supposed to allow fewer furlough days, smaller class sizes and special programs?

There are some real winners and losers here and the winners are certainly not “the children.”

Penny Wood

Vista

The fight to recover benefits

Mayor Filner’s efforts to return recognition to public servants and fair bargaining to contract workers isn’t going unnoticed. I, for one, think it’s exactly what our economy needs. The San Diego middle class has been all but abandoned for the last four decades. It’s good to see him fight to recover benefits for them.

There is a lot of wealth in our city. Too much of it is in too few hands. We are better served as a community when workers receive a livable wage, can afford to raise a family and are able to provide for their immediate and long-term needs.

Jack DeTate

San Marcos

National weapons safeguard solution

We could implement a plan that requires weapons owners to carry insurance on their weapons. Encourage nonprofit insurance companies to be the source for offering weapons coverage.

Insurance could provide a liability clause for money to the injured party of the insured weapons.

All insured weapons would be included in a national identification database and have forensic evidence, for example, rifling from the barrel of a firearm documented and provided at time of registration.

People would get discounts for having weapon locks, safety education/training and weapons safes.

Insurance companies would provide funds from the profits to further education in weapons handling/ safeguards, medical coverage for people injured by a non-insured or unknown weapon, and also provide mental health resources.

When people receive discounts, they will be encouraged to provide locks and safes for their weapons, and also seek education/training for whole household.